Trying to intimidate journalists is wrong
I disagree strongly with left-wing reporter Ken Klippenstein on many issues, but he has the right to publish the "manifesto" of the alleged Israeli embassy shooter without getting a visit from the FBI
I am linking two articles from Ken Klippenstein, who is an independent reporter with a large Substack following. The first is the “manifesto” posted by Elias Rodriguez, the Chicago man who allegedly gunned down two Israeli Embassy staffers in cold blood in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday. The second is an account Klippenstein published today of a “visit” he received from two Federal Bureau of Investigation agents following his posting of the manifesto.
Obviously, I don’t endorse the manifesto, and I find the shooter’s antisemitic violence horrifying. But pretending these strains of thought do not exist does not slow their growth.
Even more importantly, from my point of view, government efforts to discourage journalists from publishing as they see fit are dangerous and wrong. I have felt the sting and power of the federal government when it tries to suppress speech, and I will stand with other reporters, even those whose views I disagree with. I wish they had done the same for me back in 2020 and 2021.
The First Amendment matters more than ever.
—
First, the manifesto itself:
—
(Stand for free speech. Even if you hate what the speaker is saying.)
—
Now, Ken’s discussion of his visit from the FBI:
So reading about his visit from the FBI and the questions they asked, I had a whole different feeling than I originally thought. As a minister, there are things that if I heard, confidentiality goes out the window. (And i will tell people that in advance. FYI if a crime involves child abuse...im going to the police.)
After reading the questions, I wondered about this. When and how did he get the manifesto? Did he keep quiet so he could have a big story after the murder? And so on. These are not questions that are meant to intimidate, but rather see if he was involved.
As I said, I originally thought that this was blatant intimidation. After reading tge questions given to his attorney, the questions were valid and should be answered.
He should have answered them before he published the manifesto too.
If you publish relevant information related to a high profile terrorism hate crime, expect a high profile visit from the FBI. It really seems that simple to me.